It would definitely be a ticket to reckon with to be sure. I definitely heavily disagree with both of them on certain issues but they are entirely reasonable in comparison to the rest of the Republican candidates (not that that necessarily says much). I'm just worried that the GOP has gone so far off the grid that they wouldn't actually consider either Rubio or Kasich as 'conservative' enough.

I know that in the democratic process you’re not going to always get everything you want.

This is so far from where the party is now I don't know that a politician who said that could get elected today. And the quote is from Conservative Idol Ronald Reagan.

This article lays out a good path to winning an election but the reality of the Republican party is shambles and obstructionism. Kasich seems reasonable but you've got this whole wing of the party who want to deport every day laborer using SWAT style APCs and at the same time usher in some Randian free market utopia where the poor are ground into cattle feed because the market finds that viable. There's no strategy, they're shouting at each other as much as they're shouting at the Dems on the hill and they're really not nationally viable because of it.

Rubio, with his youthful appearance, could also help attract voters between the ages of 18 and 29, 60 percent of whom supported Obama in 2012.

How fucking cynical is that statement? Young people vote for attractive people? I get this guy is trying to build a ticket to win, and abhorr that winning is more important than any issue, but that's the best you can do? Rubio is handsome? Old White Man/Handsome Cuban 2016, put your money on that because we can win Ohio, Florida and the shallow vote.

How fucking cynical is that statement? Young people vote for attractive people? I get this guy is trying to build a ticket to win, and abhorr that winning is more important than any issue, but that's the best you can do? Rubio is handsome? Old White Man/Handsome Cuban 2016, put your money on that because we can win Ohio, Florida and the shallow vote.

I mean, that's a pretty hyperbolic interpretation. I think the argument is that Rubio would "help attract" (not unilaterally garner the votes of) young people who wouldn't have otherwise voted for another old white Republican. Rubio's a fresh, persuasive, telegenic face, and it politics that does matter.

There's no substance to the article. It doesn't put any platform forward except to win by taking Florida and Ohio. Me pointing out one line that seems particularly cynical doesn't change the cynical thesis which is "win the election" regardless of any particular policy. I don't know that much about William Buckley but I think his time at the National Review was intellectually deeper than exploiting the electoral college